Marlins Hope To Trade Stanton, Gordon, Prado

[jordan]

12 minutes ago, Calzone said:

His tax liability will dictate his next destination. Once again the no trade clause has a stranglehold on that organizations options.

I can’t see Arte doing anything with Stanton with the possibility of having to guarantee Trout a very similar package in the near future. If Upton leaves their focus will shift to filling left field again. 

So it comes down to whether Arte wants to go ALL IN until 2020 and take on a contract that he would have to surpass to keep Trout, or go with Upton and other smaller contracts (compared to Stanton) and then give Trout that gargantuan contract.

[floplag]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I think you have a dozen posts regarding getting Stanton as not realistic or we don't have the resources or whatever.

You have never made any legitimate point to show it is not realistic or that the Angels don't have the resources.

Actually predicting the Angels will get him is silly because lots of teams likely would love to have him.

But to keep beating the drum of it being unrealistic is kind of an eye roller.

 

Actually i have, many times.   but ill recap for you...

In this case i don't see MIA making this a pure salary dump, they want quality prospects that are a couple years away.  We have a few, but i dont think ours are regarded enough to justify a trade of this nature.   We simply dont have that much prospect capital and would only be viable if a pure salary dump happens and we eat it all.

For a pure salary dump to happen it would likely blow us past the luxury tax.  The front office isn't likely to take on that much money in our current state.  They have made it abundantly clear that the luxury tax isnt something they want to deal with.  

Add to this that we arent one Stanton away from being a WS contender and still have other holes to fill and it quickly becomes moot. 

Is it possible, of course, virtually anything is if the situation breaks right.  Maybe noone else wants to dump the farm or take on the money and we are the only option MIA has, but i doubt that ends up the case.  They may prove me wrong, perhaps they will surprise me, but i doubt it.  The bottom line is that there is a big difference between possible and realistic. 

Tell you what, why don't you convince me it is realistic rather than just giving me shit for my opinion?   Tell me how we do this and fill 2B/3B and the bullpen or starters and stay under the luxury tax? 

[NorCal Halo]

If taking Prado in addition to Stanton and Gordon and their entire salary would get the deal done, would you do it?  Maybe Calhoun and Cron for the three straight up?

[Ohtaniland]

33 minutes ago, jordan111280 said:

So it comes down to whether Arte wants to go ALL IN until 2020 and take on a contract that he would have to surpass to keep Trout, or go with Upton and other smaller contracts (compared to Stanton) and then give Trout that gargantuan contract.

I think so. I just can’t see any organization taking on two $300-$400M guaranteed no trade long term deals concurrently. Especially when it’s not one of the giant market teams like the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers. The Angels will only go big for Trout because the Pujols contract is already rotting below their feet. 

[totdprods]

10 minutes ago, Calzone said:

I think so. I just can’t see any organization taking on two $300-$400M guaranteed no trade long term deals concurrently. Especially when it’s not one of the giant market teams like the Yankees, Red Sox or Dodgers. The Angels will only go big for Trout because the Pujols contract is already rotting below their feet. 

For awhile there, we had Pujols, Hamilton, Trout, Wilson, and Weaver all under $680m worth of committed money.

[Dick B Back]

47 minutes ago, NorCal Halo said:

If taking Prado in addition to Stanton and Gordon and their entire salary would get the deal done, would you do it?  Maybe Calhoun and Cron for the three straight up?

Of course, not my dime.

[AngelsLakersFan]

3 hours ago, red321 said:

If I'm a Marlin's fan, or a resident of the Miami area...I'm starting to wonder what the hell.

First Loaria with the continuous tear downs, fleeces the city and state for a new stadium and gets out of town with a dollar bills falling out of his pockets and now a new ownership group comes in...and immediately starts cutting payroll once again.

That and they'll probably retire Jeter's number

Seriously. I don't know wtf is wrong with Miami. They really aren't far off from competing, and it's not like their payroll situation is out of hand. 

[Mark68]

"

59 minutes ago, floplag said:

Actually i have, many times.   but ill recap for you...

In this case i don't see MIA making this a pure salary dump, they want quality prospects that are a couple years away.  We have a few, but i dont think ours are regarded enough to justify a trade of this nature.   We simply dont have that much prospect capital and would only be viable if a pure salary dump happens and we eat it all.

For a pure salary dump to happen it would likely blow us past the luxury tax.  The front office isn't likely to take on that much money in our current state.  They have made it abundantly clear that the luxury tax isnt something they want to deal with.  

Add to this that we arent one Stanton away from being a WS contender and still have other holes to fill and it quickly becomes moot. 

Is it possible, of course, virtually anything is if the situation breaks right.  Maybe noone else wants to dump the farm or take on the money and we are the only option MIA has, but i doubt that ends up the case.  They may prove me wrong, perhaps they will surprise me, but i doubt it.  The bottom line is that there is a big difference between possible and realistic. 

Tell you what, why don't you convince me it is realistic rather than just giving me shit for my opinion?   Tell me how we do this and fill 2B/3B and the bullpen or starters and stay under the luxury tax? 

Allow me to repost the paragraph from the article that contradicts what you are saying:

"Talk of a possible Stanton swap has been building in earnest for months. And it comes as little surprise to hear that the team is indeed preparing to market him, given its reported intentions of making significant payroll reductions in the first offseason under new ownership. Obvious as it may be that now is the time to part with the slugger, it’s notable that the team has evidently chosen its direction even as it prepares to sit downwith him in a few days’ time. (Stanton, of course, enjoys full no-trade protection and so will have a major say in things.) And the team’s reported intentions perhaps hint that the focus could be on moving all of Stanton’s salary rather than maximizing the prospect return."

[Ohtaniland]

39 minutes ago, totdprods said:

For awhile there, we had Pujols, Hamilton, Trout, Wilson, and Weaver all under $680m worth of committed money.

That’s five different roster spots getting covered. If they plan on giving Trout $350M+ you can forget about Stanton. 

[Mark68]

13 minutes ago, Calzone said:

That’s five different roster spots getting covered. If they plan on giving Trout $350M+ you can forget about Stanton. 

Why? What insider knowledge do you have?

Pujols only has one more year left after Trout's contract expires. Do you think that $30 million for 2021 will really keep Arte from taking Stanton's contract off the Marlins' hands? Pujols will hopefully have retired by then.

Apples and oranges.

[floplag]

37 minutes ago, Mark68 said:

"

Allow me to repost the paragraph from the article that contradicts what you are saying:

"Talk of a possible Stanton swap has been building in earnest for months. And it comes as little surprise to hear that the team is indeed preparing to market him, given its reported intentions of making significant payroll reductions in the first offseason under new ownership. Obvious as it may be that now is the time to part with the slugger, it’s notable that the team has evidently chosen its direction even as it prepares to sit downwith him in a few days’ time. (Stanton, of course, enjoys full no-trade protection and so will have a major say in things.) And the team’s reported intentions perhaps hint that the focus could be on moving all of Stanton’s salary rather than maximizing the prospect return."

which was the reason for the salary comments.  Even if they do go dump there is zero indication we are willing to take it on.  Perhaps you missed that.  

[totdprods]

54 minutes ago, Calzone said:

That’s five different roster spots getting covered. If they plan on giving Trout $350M+ you can forget about Stanton. 

No, it isn't exactly translatable, but it's not like this team has been afraid of adding huge contracts on top of several mega-contracts already. 

We had to lock in Weaver when we did, and we needed to sign Wilson as well. If this team really believes in Richards, Skaggs, Heaney, and Shoemaker and Eppler's ability to fill needs cheaply, I could see them overlapping some mega deals for a couple seasons again.

Eppler's halfway through his contract. Scioscia is a year away. Arte knows a window could be closing here, and it wouldn't surprise me to see this gang go all out now. And while it is blasphemous to talk about on this board, it'd be irresponsible for Eppler and Arte to not be considering a future without Trout even if they intent on making all efforts to retain him. I don't want to think about that possibility, but it's something they need to be considering, either if they feel they can't afford it or if they have some inclination that he is determined to go east. Going all in with Upton and a Stanton mega-deal may be their best shot at either tempting Trout to stay, or prepping themselves with some stars to hang their hopes on should Trout leave. 

If we kick off '22 with Stanton and Upton being the only ones remaining, those contract commitments aren't quite as scary, at least collectively. 
Heck if Stanton opts out and Upton re-signs on a 5 year deal, 2022 could be Upton's last year and all of the above could be gone.

[Ohtaniland]

4 minutes ago, Mark68 said:

Why? What insider knowledge do you have?

Pujols only has one more year left after Trout's contract expires. Do you think that $30 million for 2021 will really keep Arte from taking Stanton's contract off the Marlins' hands? Pujols will hopefully have retired by then.

Apples and oranges.

1) Pujols will collect everything that’s owed to him.

2)Calhoun would have to be moved. 

3) Trouts contract is expensive and is going to cost a ton more. 

4) Upton? We have no idea what will become of him or his contract.

5) Stanton is under a guaranteed contract with a no trade clause and with an opt out so he’s going to get paid no matter what. Because of California State taxes Arte may have to sweeten the pot to get him to come here.

If Arte hasn’t already committed to a lifetime extension for Trout, I don’t think he’s going to go all out on Stanton unless ......Arte is already planning on Trout leaving. 

[Mark68]

22 minutes ago, Calzone said:

1) Pujols will collect everything that’s owed to him.

2)Calhoun would have to be moved. 

3) Trouts contract is expensive and is going to cost a ton more. 

4) Upton? We have no idea what will become of him or his contract.

5) Stanton is under a guaranteed contract with a no trade clause and with an opt out so he’s going to get paid no matter what. Because of California State taxes Arte may have to sweeten the pot to get him to come here.

If Arte hasn’t already committed to a lifetime extension for Trout, I don’t think he’s going to go all out on Stanton unless ......Arte is already planning on Trout leaving. 

1. Pujols' pride (or whatever) may not allow him to play out the string. If anything, he might go the route of Fielder and go on the 60-day DL and the Angels collect insurance. Yes, that AAV still goes against the CBT, but Arte saves a chunk of that money.

2. Not necessarily, especially if Uptout.

3. Yes. This already is a fixed cost, however, at least until its expiration in 2020.

4. We don't. But we do. He'll opt out unless he gets extended/more AAV.

5. I don't think taxes have kept anyone from signing in California. You go where the money is. The money is on the East Coast, Cali, and Chicago. Guess what? Taxes are high in all those places. This argument, IMO, is a red herring.

[Dtwncbad]

4 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

As much as I'd love to have Stanton, if it is him or Upton I'll go with Upton. Why, considering that Stanton >>> Upton? Well, Upton won't cost tons of premier prospects. Even if the Angels take on all of Stanton's contract, he's still going to require quite a haul of prospects while Upton will cost none - just money. Lots of teams will be interested in Stanton, including some with deeper farm systems. Just to be taken seriously, the Angels would need to start with a package of four or more of their top 20 prospects - maybe something like Barria, Marsh, Ward, and Suarez (or similar configuration), and probably someone will well outbid that.

Except the vast majority of baseball reporters project that it will very specifically NOT require a big haul of premium prospects because of the salary that comes with Stanton.

If Stanton was under a 5 yr/$10m per year contract then the prospects needed to get him would be staggering.

Few teams can afford the contract at all and while his talent and performance is attractive you take on the fair cost of it.

It's like acquiring a two-year old Ferrari.  You are probably just taking over payments.

I dont know why people think otherwise.

The reality is the Marlins will want a body or two (or three) to save face.  But they are not going to be premium prospects if the acquiring team takes the whole salary.

[Ohtaniland]

5 minutes ago, Mark68 said:

1. Pujols' pride (or whatever) may not allow him to play out the string. If anything, he might go the route of Fielder and go on the 60-day DL and the Angels collect insurance. Yes, that AAV still goes against the CBT, but Arte saves a chunk of that money.

2. Not necessarily, especially if Uptout.

3. Yes. This already is a fixed cost, however, at least until its expiration in 2020.

4. We don't. But we do. He'll opt out unless he gets extended/more AAV.

5. I don't think taxes have kept anyone from signing in California. You go where the money is. The money is on the East Coast, Cali, and Chicago. Guess what? Taxes are high in all those places. This argument, IMO, is a red herring.

Well Stanton could choose to stay put. He’s working in Florida and is thriving in one of the newest ML stadiums with the best contract in MLB. 

[Docwaukee]

we would probably have to add money to Stanton's deal to offset the state tax or he might say no.  

[ettin]

3 hours ago, DMVol said:

I have no inside info but my guess is that you hear Upton has re-upped for an additional year as soon as the Series is over....does not ever get to the opt out.....it makes too much sense for both sides, which may be why it doesn't happen....

True but in that case he will probably not even opt-out in the sense that it is his intent to rejoin the FA pool, it will simply be a new extension. That is fine with me Upton is good.

[Taylor]

2 hours ago, NorCal Halo said:

If taking Prado in addition to Stanton and Gordon and their entire salary would get the deal done, would you do it?  Maybe Calhoun and Cron for the three straight up?

In what world would the Marlins trade one of the best hitters in baseball and a plus-2B for Calhoun and Cron?

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, Taylor said:

In what world would the Marlins trade one of the best hitters in baseball and a plus-2B for Calhoun and Cron?

One where they save $300+ million.

[ukyah]

5 hours ago, jordan111280 said:

A lot is going to come down to WHERE he wants to play, with a full no-trade clause.  If he wants only SoCal, then Angels, Dodgers, and Padres get in a bidding war, entire west coast...then a few more teams.  But we don't know where he prefers to play.

you said padres. lolz.

[Mark68]

1 hour ago, Calzone said:

Well Stanton could choose to stay put. He’s working in Florida and is thriving in one of the newest ML stadiums with the best contract in MLB. 

He could, but he also has stated he does not want to go thru a rebuilding process.

[ukyah]

1 hour ago, Calzone said:

Well Stanton could choose to stay put. He’s working in Florida and is thriving in one of the newest ML stadiums with the best contract in MLB. 

he's already said he doesn't want to be a part of a rebuild.

[Angel Oracle]

2 hours ago, Mark68 said:

Why? What insider knowledge do you have?

Pujols only has one more year left after Trout's contract expires. Do you think that $30 million for 2021 will really keep Arte from taking Stanton's contract off the Marlins' hands? Pujols will hopefully have retired by then.

Apples and oranges.

Even if they are paying Pujols beyond 2020, couldn’t they Bonilla the 2021 salary over say 5 years and open up about $18 million AAV for 2021?

[nando714]

Pujols didn’t mean to mind the state tax when choosing over who?....the Miami Marlins 

stanton is a California kid and LA kid at that. All the teams connected are from California it seems, I’m sure he’d be thrilled to join the giants angels or dodgers regardless of tax